Re: Arguments by Nadia

I agree completely with you about the right of Native peoples to adapt to new ways of doing things--we allow nearly every other culture to adapt without claiming that it negates the culture. One of the underlying features of culture is that it adapts.
I also wanted to note that someone will complain regardless of the way the whaling is carried out: if it is done traditionally (harpooning), animal rights activists complain about the inhumanity. If they use an elephant gun, there are complaints about deviation from tradition (which of course Native Americans can't do). There never seems to be a time when everyone can compromise on the matter.
--Kathryn Ritchie

(I couldn't get the site to allow me to attach this comment directly to your post, sorry)

Wane Johnson of the Makah

By Craig Berard:

My last post (for now so that I'll have posted enough for a presentation of this blog). This is a short interview with Makah Whaler Wane Johnson. He was captain of the 1999 hunt, and the 2007 hunt which had been ruled illegal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xG84zhwEGFs
He makes a good case for his actions. The government had been dragging its feet for eight years, not able to go to meetings, bogged down by financial strains from this process, and the thought that their treaty which should take precedence and give them exemption was being held hostage by animal rights groups.

To him the situation was desperate, and something had to be done to get it moving.
The politicizing of this issue by so many groups on top of that is beyond belief.

By Craig Berard:

The Makah Tribal Jouney.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaKrbWad3wo
It really warms my heart to see that some of their best sacred traditions are still alive and free of harassment from people with virtually no investment in their culture. Even in the absence of whaling, the Makah resiliently maintain a tradition that promotes the health and well being by allowing the people a means to come together as a community.

And like aboriginal whaling, this is hard to do. Travelling for miles in a canoe that could easily topple over, and toss everyone into the frigid waters of the Strait of Juan de Fuca and the Puget Sound takes serious cajones. Granted for the sake of safety it's become more sophisticated. For instance GPS and support boats weren't always part of the canoe journey. I guess it's as close to authentic as you can get without being insane.

All the same, I hope they can keep doing this every year until the end of time.

Thanks so much for your posts Kathryn. I greatly appreciate it. It's so typical that science should take precedence over preserving a culture teetering on the edge of extinction. To be honest I don't even understand it. Granted, the Makah would still make use of the whales killed by sonar, as unfortunately they have been forced to make do with whatever manages to drift ashore in the years since the (temporary) ban on their whaling practices. It's just not the same, though. As for the ending comment from your article, that it's like tellingthem they can't go to church for 10 years. Try telling them they can't go to church for 65 years, letting them return for a brief revisit, and then threatening to throw them in prison if they return again. It's a struggle that many animal rights advocates don't understand and simply will not recognize. I hope the Makah win. -Craig B

Twilight?

On a fun sidenote for all you Twilighters out there in the world...my sister being one obsessed twi-hard, I've been informed that there are many Makah references throughout the book. Prrretty cool guys.

-Nadia

Navy Sonar versus Makah Whaling

By Kathryn Ritchie

Sorry I’m bombarding you all at once like this-it seems all quarter I’ve been dealing with stomach bugs, head bumps, strep throat, and, most recently, conjunctivitis (a child in preschool in winter ends up with everything possible…), but now the weather is better and it’s only allergies, so I finally have the free time for this assignment.
I found a site at Columbia for Case Studies in Earth & Environmental Science Journalism ( http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/edu/eesj/casestudies/sonar.html ), which raised the rather interesting question of why public reaction might be different for Makah whaling versus the whales which were found beached and with hemorrhaging in their brains due to Navy sonar testing (found here: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/03/0331_040331_whalesincrisis.html ). Apparently, because the Navy is not intentionally whaling and is conducting “science,” that makes it okay for whales to rot on beaches? The Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that sonar testing is necessary for homeland security, and the whales aren’t as important. How about the revitalization of the Makah culture? Shouldn’t that have equal importance?

Wayne Johnson Interview

By Kathryn Ritchie

Here’s a link to an interview with Wayne Johnson on Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xG84zhwEGFs
I still don’t quite understand why the Makah whaling rights have been (temporarily) revoked. I’ve seen that the hunt is “inhumane” (Fund for Animals president Michael Markarian), but the Makah actually chose to use a .50 caliber rifle instead of harpooning the whale to death, in order to be as humane as possible. I’ve already talked about subsistence. The grey whale is not currently listed as endangered. The Makah are not attempting to hunt more whales than sustainable—this isn’t commercial whaling. What, exactly, is the problem?
The cultural importance of whaling for the Makah is so important. After the whale hunt in 1999, the culture experienced a much-needed revival. I can’t blame these men for trying to help perpetuate the spiritual rewards of whaling for their people. The treaty should not be broken.

P-I Article on Illegal Whaling in 2007...

By Kathryn Ritchie
I found this article about the illegal whale hunt in September 2007; why I’ve posted this is pretty clear from the article:
Makah 'treaty warriors': Heroes or criminals?
Whaling case has political implications for all U.S. tribes
By PAUL SHUKOVSKY
P-I REPORTER
NEAH BAY -- The high school security guard in this Indian fishing village was the last man to see the gray whale alive before it forever slipped beneath the waves.
Joe McGimpsey doesn't consider himself a shaman, but he was the one the Makah Tribal Council sent in a small boat to recite sacred chants over the dying behemoth -- the victim of a rogue hunt in September.
It wouldn't have been right to let the whale die alone, said McGimpsey, who has often prayed with whalers in his sweat lodge.
Like most people here, McGimpsey -- a good-humored man with a penchant for seeing the ordinary and calling it "magic" -- was troubled because the surprise hunt lacked the intense discipline and spiritual preparation that mark tribally sanctioned whaling.
But he won't pass judgment on the five rogue whalers, who see themselves as "treaty warriors" -- defenders of their tribe's 153-year-old treaty with the United States. "I am not going to sit here and condemn them," McGimpsey said.
Early next month, the whalers -- who don't deny killing their prey -- face criminal charges in Tacoma's U.S. District Court for unlawfully taking a whale.
The case has political implications, not only for the Makahs' ancient whaling way of life, but for the sanctity of all tribal treaties with the United States.
On Sept. 8, Frankie Gonzales, Wayne Johnson, Andrew Noel, Theron Parker and William Secor Sr. drove a harpoon into the whale's flank at least four times. They also shot the animal at least 16 times with large-caliber rifles.
But before they could deliver the coup de grace, the Coast Guard arrested them. Twelve hours passed before the whale died, sinking in 700-foot-deep waters in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. The hunt sparked nationwide headlines and angered animal-rights activists.
Prosecutors charged the whalers with violating the Marine Mammal Protection Act, a misdemeanor that carries up to a year in jail. If found guilty of also violating tribal laws, they could face time in a reservation jail.
The Makahs have always taken a moderate approach in exercising their right to hunt whales. Even though it's been nine years since the tribe last took a whale under federal supervision, they've continued working through the system -- absorbing frustrating setbacks dealt by the courts in response to lawsuits filed by animal-rights activists.
At the time of the rogue hunt, the tribe was working to solidify its status as a whaling tribe. In Congress, an exemption to the Marine Mammal Protection Act that would allow whale hunts without so much red tape was in the works. And the National Marine Fisheries Service was making progress toward issuing a permit for the next hunt.
But Johnson, the whaling captain, and his crew finally lost patience.
Johnson, 55, said he was thinking of the next generation of Makah whalers when he launched the hunt for the gray whale.
"The five of us did this to protect the kids," he said. "If nobody exercises their treaty right -- we don't have one."
John McCarty, a tribal elder and former executive director of the tribe's whaling commission, was outraged.
"I've never been so mad in my life," McCarty said. "Right on the verge of everything happening, and they did that to us."
Like McCarty, many people here think the rogue hunt was a major mistake. But most are also deeply sympathetic. They say they're sick of jumping through the government's hoops to conduct a hunt that they see as their cultural and legal right.
Even McCarty's son, Tribal Chairman Micah McCarty, has some sympathy for the whalers.
"But in my opinion," he said, "the art of politics was not even considered when they went out and did this."
'Treated like rock stars'
The Makahs signed the Treaty of Neah Bay in 1855, giving up vast tracts of forest lands laced with streams teeming with salmon.
The only treaty recognizing a tribe's right to hunt whales, it's an acknowledgement that Makah culture and spirituality -- not to mention traditional cuisine -- are thoroughly infused with whales and whaling.
But Johnson fears the treaty is becoming another landmark in a long trail of broken promises.
"The government has dwindled our treaty down to nothing" by allowing lawsuits and red tape to stymie hunts, Johnson said.
In 1999, he headed a federally sanctioned whaling crew that brought home the first gray whale since the 1920s, when the tribe voluntarily suspended the hunt to allow the species to rebound from overhunting by white whalers.
It was the proudest moment in Johnson's life. The hunt electrified the Makahs and fueled a cultural renaissance in Neah Bay, a village of about 2,000 people that has been devastated by substance abuse and a 60 percent unemployment rate.
"Imperialism and colonialism have wreaked havoc on our culture, and it has had devastating effects on our well-being for generations," said Micah McCarty. "What whaling did for us back in the '90s was it began to heal the old wounds of transgenerational trauma. It inspired our people to remember who they are and where they come from.
"If you are focused on (native) singing and dancing and learning your language and your friends are getting involved in the culture, you are not getting into alcohol and drugs."
The men who brought home the whale nine years ago were treated like rock stars. Said Johnson: "All the high school kids back then wanted to go hunting like we did."
"They were the crew that kept the treaty alive," said Arnie Hunter, a traditional chief of Neah Bay.
In 2004, after two previous rulings, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decided that the Fisheries Service must apply more stringent environmental reviews to the Makah hunts. Whaling has been in limbo ever since.
"It's another treaty broken by the United States," an angry Johnson declared after the ruling. "I'm going whaling again."
Micah McCarty says the court-imposed delays have sapped the tribe's morale. "A lot of our people have become disillusioned with the system," he said. "People have become frustrated at these challenges to our way of life. Some people turn to chemical dependency as a way of self-medicating their frustrations. ... But the strongest medicine is always our cultural values and cultural practices."
The whale hunt was strong medicine for Johnson, too.
Life hasn't always been kind to Johnson, who has endured long periods of joblessness. He's had a few minor run-ins with the law, and acknowledges struggling -- sometimes unsuccessfully -- to stay sober.
"Without the whaling -- it's tempting to go back to my old ways," he said. "When I was whaling, it gave me focus, it gave me purpose, it gave me discipline and it was a lot easier to stay clean and sober. I need it back. I need to go back to my spiritual, religious belief."
'A protest hunt'
On April 8, when U.S. Magistrate Judge J. Kelley Arnold presides over the whaling trial, he'll be deciding whether the Marine Mammal Protection Act or Whaling Convention Act trump Native Americans' treaty rights.
That's got Micah McCarty worried.
Tribes hang on to their treaties with fierce tenacity, knowing the words are all that protect them from disappearing into the American melting pot. They frequently point to the Constitution, which calls treaties "the supreme Law of the Land."
The prosecution "has the potential to put the treaty in a much more vulnerable position," said McCarty, who hopes the case can be settled with an 11th-hour plea bargain.
When the 9th Circuit decided in 2004 to put the hunt on hold, it was a blow for treaty tribes. The ruling meant the executive branch must regulate the Makahs' right to hunt whales under the treaty without explicit approval of such regulation by Congress.
It's a frightening precedent for Indian Country that can be applied to all treaty tribes in the vast Western territory covered by the 9th Circuit. The Makahs decided in 2004 not to risk appealing that decision to the Supreme Court, fearing the ruling could become a national mandate. But if the five whalers lose in Tacoma, they could bypass the tribal decision and appeal the matter all the way to the Supreme Court.
Defense attorney Jack Fiander, a member of the Yakama Indian Nation, has sought to dismiss the charges on a variety of grounds revolving around the supremacy of the Makah treaty over federal laws.
"The case has politics all around the fringes of it," he said. "You are dealing with the political issue of what balance the government should reach in terms of upholding treaties and enforcing regular laws.
"This was a protest hunt," Fiander added. "It was civil disobedience."
Assistant U.S. Attorney Jim Oesterle has been careful to say repeatedly that the government "is not pitting the tribe's treaty rights against conservation" of whales. "We are talking about regulating the treaty right, not abrogating it."
U.S. Attorney for Western Washington Jeff Sullivan said there has been consultation on the case with top Justice Department officials. Before Sullivan's office filed charges against the men, there were consultations with the agency's section responsible for Indian issues. The case was also reviewed by the deputy attorney general's office.
The trial is expected to take about a week. Fiander plans to call tribal elders to testify about the importance of whaling to the Makahs.
"These folks haven't been able to harvest a whale and conduct all the ceremonies that their whaling culture is tied to since 1999," said Fiander, who wants the case thrown out on religious-freedom grounds. "It's like someone telling you that you can't go to church for 10 years."

Makah Whaling and Subsistence

By Kathryn Ritchie

Because this is a topic with which I am not yet very familiar, I am starting off with an overview of the Makah whaling controversy. I have been looking for arguments both for and against whaling by the Makah, and from what I have seen (from the Humane Society of the United States, article at http://www.hsus.org/marine_mammals/marine_mammals_news/federal_appeals_court_bars_makah_tribe_from_whaling.html ), the arguments against center around whale not being necessary for the subsistence of the Makah people. I’ll argue with this concept.
There’s an obvious clash in cultural ideology going on here. The HSUS are stating that the Makah don’t need to subsist on whale, because they hadn’t whaled for so long. What the HSUS is not taking into consideration is that the Makah voluntarily ceased whaling back in the 1920s, because the whale population had become critically low from commercial hunting (I found this from http://www.historylink.org/index.cfm?DisplayPage=output.cfm&File_Id=5301 ). In other words, the treaty right to whale was never taken away from the Makah people.
Another consideration not accounted for by the HSUS is the psychological importance of whaling to the Makah people. At http://www.makah.com, I found the statement, “Many Makah feel that our health problems result, in some degree, to the loss of our traditional diet of seafood and marine mammal meat.” Although I really don’t have the background or pertinent information on current Makah diets to say whether there is a physical truth to this statement, it implicitly becomes true because it is what the people believe. You can’t just go and superimpose your own beliefs on another culture!
Finally, it should be pointed out that when the Makah did harvest a whale in 1999, the meat was used for…you guessed it, subsistence. Yes, there is a ceremonial aspect of whaling for the Makah, but that, again, is due to the nature of the culture: it just isn’t possible to extricate the ceremony, because it isn’t a separate system of the culture.

Makah-Contorversy, IWC Quota

By Craig Berard

Here is a short documentary on youtube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rde9E8pUWI4
I found it quite interesting to hear the Q&A by one of the Makah tribal council members.
In response the question by the BBC reporter Richard Black,"Micah, can you explain why it is that the Makah tribal council would like to reintroduce whaling?" Micah McCarty of the Makah Tribal Council stated, "It's part of keeping our culture alive, and what we work for is keeping the living breath of our ancestors alive. The only way you can do that is by transgenerational passage of traditions and culture. And whaling is a central figure to who we are as a people."
That's absolutely right. It cannot be overstated how important and central whaling has been to the Makah as a people and as a nation.
Unfortunately, it may be easy to view the Makah as just people like the rest of us, in which case one might conclude that humans in general are far from going extinct; so why make an exception for these people by allowing them to continue whaling? But then looking at the Makah as a unique culture, and as a people who form a distinct national identity deeply connected to a long history in Washington state, another might say that they are critically endangered. And that living breath that has passed on through generations is at serious risk of dying out.
My feeling is that these environmentalists are going too far in their efforts to be so focused on these people who managed to hunt whales successfully for hundreds and hundreds of years. Most greatly due to the limitations that their method has in terms of range. They, like other aboriginal whalers do not (and should not) use power boats, or long range ships. So that if they over harvest the whales near the coast, other whales that are farther out are still able to replenish their numbers by being out of reach of these human powered long boats. Therefore it's the technologically advanced/long range whaling that the environmentalists should focus their efforts on, because these whalers are not halted in their harvesting by a limited range that they can harvest from. And that has actually been the deciding factor in the decimation of whale populations by human hunting.
So long as their keeping to their sustainable traditions, I say leave the Makah alone.

Arguments

by: Nadia Omar

The arguments that have been developed to try and stop the Makah from whale hunting
have, to an extent, been a means to further control the culture by the govermnet that is
native to this tribe. Major opponents such as the Sea Shepherd (Whale Wars) have sited the Japanese as responsible for the Makah whale hunt. It's important to note though that the only Japanese involvement that has taken place in Neah Bay was with an organization that the Makah are not even a part of, the World Council of Whales.

Ben Johnson (Makah Tribal Council) has said that “Japan wanted to give us money, to help us buy boats, to show us how to kill the whales, everything....We said no because we knew it would be very controversial, and we want to do everything by the book.” (NAE) Going back to traditional values to support the hunt is amongst some of the many misunderstandings the the Makah face. Members of the Sea Shepherd state that
the Makah are mearly being taken advantage of by the Japanses, being used like pawns and that they are overlypassive people. The Makah greatly oppose this view. The Makah have the desire to hunt because it is IMPORTANT TO THEIR CULTURE AND THEIR WAY OF LIFE. I think it's those on the Sea Shepherd that are trying to manipulate everyone else, and using drastic measures to do so.

Another argument has to do with the rising of technology being used during the hunt. A quote from an unnamed woman
on the Native Americans and Environment website (http://NCSEonline.org/NAE/) blabs :

"If they are so hell bent on going back to their roots, why the hell do they insist on: driving cars,
using internal combustion engines, fibreglass, aluminum, roads, shopping centres,
all the other stuff that has improved their lives since the coming of the “White Man.” " (J.Bray, “Makah Whale Hunt.” Whales on the Net. Last access: 3/18/99.
)

Well now I'm sorry, I had no idea that people were unable to adapt new ways of life and doing things. It's unfair.
Why should these tribes have to choose between culture and trying to keep up in American society and economics.

To conclude I leave you with this paragraph:

"In short, whaling opponents frequently make colonialist arguments that
delegitimize the Makah’s right to whale by comparing the Makah unfavorably
to an ahistorical and idealized portrait of Native Americans. Many non-natives
appreciate in vague terms that Native Americans were “in harmony” with their environment.
With our concern to create a environmentally sound culture and society, Native Americans
form a ready target for the projection of our fears and fantasies. Just as long, of course,
as real Native Americans with real needs do not intrude on these representations. Then an
elaborate arsenal of colonialist arguments can be raised to suggest that it is not our own
stereotypes but modern Native Americans who are wrong. Whatever one believes about the morality
of whale hunting, these arguments are themselves an injustice to the Makah." (NCSE, http://NCSEonline.org/NAE/)

Excuse me for my millionth post of the day but I just keep finding all these different articles pertaining to this controversy. I think it's important to know the legislation that has taken place over the last hundred years, seeing as how we've gone over many different forms of treaties and legislation over the last few weeks in class. I've posted the treaty of 1855 along with a website that gives background information.

Here is the treaty documentation :

Treaty of 1855

"A History of Treaty-Making and
Reservations on the Olympic Peninsula

• Makah Treaty -- 1855

Steven's treaty commission dropped anchor in Neah Bay on January 29, 1855-just three days after it had negotiated a treaty with the Clallam, Skokomish, and Chemakum. (See Report of Governor Isaac I. Stevens, 1854.) The commission immediately sent a messenger out to the outlying villages to invite them to the treaty negotiations and then established camp, setting up tents and stocking the camp for the Indians' arrival. On the 30th Stevens and Gibbs set out across Cape Flattery looking for the best place to locate a reservation. Returning to camp in the evening, Stevens invited the Makah leaders who had arrived onto the schooner for a pre-treaty meeting. Speaking through interpreters, he explained the proposed treaty to them.

Figure 10. Makah Houses and Canoes on Beach at Neah Bay, Washington, 1911
University of Washington Libraries Digital Collections, Portraits Collection

When he finished, several of the Indians expressed their concerns, particularly about preserving their right to catch fish and take whales. Kal chote, a Makah leader, said "he thought he ought to have the right to fish, and take whales, and get food where he liked. He was afraid that if he could not take halibut where he wanted, he would become poor." Later Kal chote added "I want always to live on my old ground, and to die on it. I only want a small piece for a house, and will live as a friend to the whites, and they should fish together." Although, like Kal chote, most of the Makah were reluctant to give up their land, they indicated a willingness to share it with the whites and Stevens steered them toward the idea of living year-round in their winter villages and then dismissed them to think it over. Before they left, the governor asked them to choose a "head chief" and, when they didn't, Stevens chose one for them, picking Tse kwan wootl, a leader from the Ozette village on the Pacific coast.

The next morning, on January 31, about 600 Makah gathered to hear Stevens explain the treaty:

The Great Father has sent me to see you, and give you his mind. The whites are crowding in upon you. The Great Father wishes to give you your homes, to buy your land, and give a fair price for it, leaving you land enough to live on and raise potatoes. He knows what whalers you are, how far you go to sea to take whales. He will send you barrels in which to put your oil, kettles to try it out, lines and implements to fish with. The Great Father wants your children to go to school, and learn trades.

Then, "the treaty was ... read and interpreted and explained, clause by clause." Observers recalled that Stevens asked the Makah leaders if they were satisfied with the treaty or if they had any objections. In reply the Indians presented white flags to Stevens, and Kal chote responded by saying "What you have said is good, and what you have written is good."

The Neah Bay Treaty created a small reservation for the Makah at the far northwestern corner of the territory and expressed many of the key concepts of the nation's policy of Indian assimilation. While it required the Makah to move to the reservation within one year of the treaty ratification (the Senate did not approve it until 1859), it allowed the President of the United States to relocate other tribes onto the Makah reserve or, at his discretion, remove the Makah to another location. The treaty also contained provisions that allowed the Makah to continue fishing, sealing and whaling "at usual and accustomed grounds or stations," permitted hunting and gathering on "open and unclaimed lands," required that they "acknowledge their dependence on the Government of the United States," banned "ardent spirits," freed all slaves, and banned trading with the British on Vancouver Island. Finally, the treaty contained a clause that gave the government the option of dividing the communal lands into individual allotments at a future, unspecified date.

In return, the Natives were promised a $30,000 annuity to be paid out over 20 years along with a $3,000 payment to prepare the reservation for farming; free access to an agricultural and industrial training school that was to be established on Puget Sound; the hiring of a blacksmith, carpenter and farmer to "instruct the Indians in their respective occupations"; and the employment of a physician to look after their health and vaccinate them against epidemic diseases.

After three cheers from the gathered Indians, the 41 newly-minted chiefs and subchiefs put their marks-Xs-alongside Stevens's signature on the treaty. (See Treaty with the Makah, 1855.) The treaty was a complex document and it is nearly certain that language barriers and cultural differences prevented the Makah from understanding the terms of the agreement, let alone comprehending the long-term effects it would have on their lives and their communities. Immediately after it was signed, the treaty commission distributed presents, packed up, and sailed away."

This and more information regarding the Pacific Northwest can be found here

Center for the Study of the Pacific Northwest

-Nadia Omar

Whaling Petition

by: Nadia Omar

Here is an article printed in the New York times regarding the petition in hopes that tribes will be able to once again continue on whaling.

In Petition to Government, Tribe Hopes for Return to Whaling Past

Kevin P. Casey for The New York Times

"I never thought I'd see a whale hunt in my lifetime," said Arnie Hunter, who is vice president of the Makah Whaling Commission.

By SARAH KERSHAW

Published: September 19, 2005

NEAH BAY, Wash. - The whaling canoes are stored in a wooden shed, idle for the past six years. They were last used when the Makah Indians were allowed to take their harpoons and a .50-caliber rifle and set out on their first whale hunt since the late 1920's.

Lauren McFalls/Associated Press

In 1999, the Makah killed their only whale since the late 1920's.

There were eight young men in a canoe with a red hummingbird, a symbol of speed, painted on the tip. There were motorboats ferrying other hunters, news helicopters, and animal rights activists in speedboats and even a submarine.

On May 17, 1999, a week into the hunt, the Makah killed a 30-ton gray whale, striking it with harpoons and then killing it with a gunshot to the back of the head.

That rainy spring day remains etched in the minds of many Makah as a defining moment in their efforts to reach back to their cultural and historical roots. It was their first kill in seven decades, and it was their last since they were stopped by court rulings. They have asked the federal government for permission to resume hunting, and public meetings on the request are scheduled for October.

The Makah, a tribe of about 1,500 near the mouth of the Strait of Juan de Fuca on the Olympic Peninsula, see themselves as whalers and continue to identify themselves spiritually with whales.

"Everybody felt like it was a part of making history," Micah L. McCarty, a tribal council member, said of the 1999 hunt. "It's inspired a cultural renaissance, so to speak. It inspired a lot of people to learn artwork and become more active in building canoes; the younger generation took a more keen interest in singing and dancing."

The Makah, a tribe of mostly fishermen that faces serious poverty and high unemployment, were guaranteed the right to hunt whales in an 1855 treaty with the United States, the only tribe with such a treaty provision. Whaling had been the tribe's mainstay for thousands of years.

But the tribe decided to stop hunting whales early in the 20th century, when commercial harvesting had depleted the species. Whale hunting was later strictly regulated nationally and internationally, and the United States listed the Northern Pacific gray whale, the one most available to the Makah, as endangered.

The protections helped the whales rebound, and they were taken off the endangered list in 1994. Several years later, the Makah won permission to hunt again, along with a $100,000 federal grant to set up a whaling commission.

By the time they were ready, none of the Makah had witnessed a whale hunt or even tasted the meat, hearing only stories passed down through the generations. They learned that the whale was a touchstone of Makah culture - the tribe's logo today pictures an eagle perched on a whale - and that the tribe's economy was built around the lucrative trade with Europeans in whale oil, used for heating and lighting, during the 18th and early 19th centuries.

For a year before the 1999 hunt, the new Makah whale hunters prepared for their sacramental pursuit, training in canoes on the cold and choppy waters of the Pacific Ocean, praying on the beach in the mornings and at the dock in the evenings.

Animal rights groups were preparing, too. When the hunt began, the small reservation and its surrounding waters were teeming with news helicopters and protest groups. On that May afternoon, when the protesters were somewhere off the reservation, the Makah killed their whale. They held a huge celebration on the beach, where 15 men were waiting to butcher the animal, its meat later kippered and stewed.

But the protests and the television cameras "took a lot of the spirituality out of it," said Dave Sones, vice chairman of the tribal council.

Mr. McCarty said, "I equate it with interrupting High Mass."

The Makah went whale hunting, largely unnoticed, again in 2000, paddling out on a 32-foot cedar whaling canoe, but they did not catch anything. Soon after, animal rights groups, including the Humane Society of the United States, sued to stop the hunting. In 2002, an appeals court declared the hunting illegal, saying the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration had not adequately studied the impact of Makah hunting on the survival of the whale species.

Despite the strict national and international regulations on whale hunting, several tribes of Alaska Natives, subsistence whale hunters for centuries, are exempt from provisions of the 1972 Marine Mammal Protection Act, allowing them to hunt the bowhead whale. That species, unlike the gray whale, is listed as endangered, said Brian Gorman, a spokesman for the oceanic agency.

Despite their treaty rights, the Makah were not granted an exemption under the 1972 act. Last February, the tribe asked the agency for a waiver that would grant them permanent rights to kill up to 20 gray whales in any five-year period, which they insist they already have under their 1855 treaty.

The Makah's request is "setting a dangerous precedent," said Naomi Rose, a marine mammal scientist for the Humane Society.

The Alaska hunting, Ms. Rose said, "is a true subsistence hunt," whereas the Makah, who view whale hunting mostly as ceremonial, are pursuing "cultural whaling" that is not essential to their diet.

"There are too many other bad actors out there" who might try to apply for waivers too, she said. The Makah "have a treaty right, but we're asking them not to exercise it," she said.

But other environmental groups, including Greenpeace, which is adamantly opposed to the commercial harvesting of whales, have remained neutral on the Makah's quest.

"No indigenous hunt has ever destroyed whale populations," said John Hocevar, an oceans specialist with Greenpeace. "And looking at the enormous other threats to whales and putting the Makah whaling in context, it's pretty different."

Mr. Gorman, of the federal fisheries agency, said: "They have a treaty right that the U.S. government signed. It doesn't take an international lawyer to figure out that they do have this treaty."

Ben Johnson Jr., the tribal council chairman and a retired fisherman, said the Makah remain baffled "that we have to jump through so many hoops."

The tribe plans to display at the local museum the skeleton of the whale killed in 1999, where it will join artifacts, including century-old whale bones, that tell the story of the Makah.

Arnie Hunter, vice president of the Makah Whaling Commission, who was on one of the motorboats during the 1999 hunt, was 59 when the tribe killed the whale. He tasted whale meat for the first time and said he liked the pungent flavor.

"My mother said she never thought she'd see a whale hunt in her lifetime," he said outside the shed where the canoes are stored. "And I never thought I'd see a whale hunt in my lifetime. Everybody was joyously crying; we never thought it would happen."

Whaling is a way of life.

Whaling and wales have been essential to the Makah culture for years upon years. The spirituality of whaling brings about a deeper meaning to the tribe. Ancient stories and songs, basketry, and dances have been based on the whale. "For the Makah Tribe, whale hunting imposes a purpose and a discipline which benefits their entire community. It is so important to the Makah, that in 1855 when the Makah ceded thousands of acres of land to the government of the United States, they explicitly reserved their right to whale within the Treaty of Neah Bay." These whales are a source of food, oil, and other goods that serve their purpose for the tribe.

This website gives in detail the importance of whaling to the Makah culture and tribe.

http://www.makah.com/whaling.htm

These traditions need to be saved! The makah treat the whales as a spiritual offering to their culture.

Please watch this video on tradition and whaling in the Makah Tribe.

Short documentary on Youtube. Watch it.

By Craig:
Since 1999 the Makah have been the subject of intense controversial debate. For the first time since 1924, the Makah had successfully killed a California Grey Whale. Here is a brief documentary on youtube. Also do be aware of some of the ignorant comments that form part of the thread underneath this submission. Some of them are quite priceless. I have seen worse though.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lR2MEI1CcsA
Note one question from a critic in the film, "if the need is spiritual, why isn't the remedy spiritual instead of nutritional?"
The answer: because native peoples do not distinguish between that which sustains the spirit and that which sustains the body. They are one and the same. ("Too Long, Too Silent: The Threat to Cedar and the Sacred Ways of the Skokomish")